-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 796
[SYCL] optimize enqueueImpKernel by making trace faster #20682
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
lslusarczyk
wants to merge
2
commits into
intel:sycl
Choose a base branch
from
lslusarczyk:enqueueImpKernel_trace
base: sycl
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
+91
−97
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As I understand, the main point of optimization is that you removed from the hot path the check if traces are enabled because you changed the reset logic. But why did you replace the template specialization with a new
SYCLConfigTraceclass? Why not apply this optimization to theSYCLConfigtemplate class, so that it is enabled for all configs?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I have seen only this one having impact on flamegraphs. You are righ - it is worth to look at other ones and try to unify approach. Changing pattern for others may be a next step. I just wanted to save time now and focus on hunting next perf bottlenecks.
SYCLConfig template class was already specialized for traces. It does not use common code from SYCLConfig. Maybe it is possible to unify this code also for all other config values. Maybe it is not - for some reason we had this specialization. I did not analyzed the rest of variables deeply.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It sounds like you suggest accumulating the tech debt in favor of performance.
So, since we already achieved the initial perf targets the pressure from our customers is decreased, so we should look for clean solution instead of intermediate steps.
In that particular case, what was the reason to get rid of template specialization?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do not introduce tech debt. I do not optimize all the code. Just the most important one. I don't do premature optimization.
Because this particular template specialization is useless. The simpler code, the better. A class without a template is simpler than templated class.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is exactly my concern: this PR introduces a discrepancy. So far, we have a unified design (maybe not the best) with template specializations for a particular config. Now we have a dedicated class (perhaps it is a simpler approach and more readable) for a particular config.
I agree that we should not do premature optimizations. But in that particular case I just suggest that we need to unify the design for all config types.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can change all specialization to concrete classes. I like simplifying the code. Will that be OK for now?